I RESPOND: It must be said, that the university of trees [universitas lignorum]3 are comprehended under three differences, according to which they could be ordained to the threefold utility of man: either on the part of the body, or on the part of the soul, or on the part of the conjoined.

3 Many codices, together with the editions, have incongruously the universality of trees [universalitas lignorum] for the university of trees [universitas lignorum], [source]

In particular, Knutzen argues that ‘all’ is 1) a distributive ‘all’ in a truly universal judgment like ‘All men are mortal’, 2) a collective ‘all’ in a judgment like ‘All the Apostles, as to number, were twelve’, which then is not universal but a singular judgment. Many texts show that Kant shares this view, e.g. Reflexion 4694: “Omnitudo distributiva est universalitas, Collectiva: totalitas, totalitas absoluta: Universitas”. [source]

***

Whereas the determinability of every concept is subordinate to the universality (universalitas) of the principle of excluded middle, the determination of a thing is subordinate to the totality (universitas) or sum of all possible predicates. [source]